You are on page 1of 3

Average Porosity

Amp, Bass, and Whiting 1171 showed that the histogram distribution
is also an excellent representation of porosity data obtained from core
analysis. Most porosity histograms are symmetrical about the mean value,
as shown in Figure 3.49. For classified data, i.e., arranged in increasing
or decreasing order, the arithmetic mean porosity is given by:
where:
Cpi = porosity at the midpoint of range, fraction
fi = frequency for porosity range, fraction
n = number of porosity ranges
For unclassified data, the arithmetic mean porosity is:
(3.128)
i=l n (3.129)

One disadvantage of the arithmetic mean is that any gross error in a
porosity value of one sample can have considerable effect on the value
of the mean. To avoid this potential problem, the average porosity value
can be obtained from another statistical measure called the median,
which is defined as the value of the middle variable of class data. It
is also the value of the variable corresponding to the 50% point on the
cumulative frequency curve. The mean and the median of a set of porosity
values rarely coincide. Unlike the mean, the median is not sensitive to
extreme values of a variable.
EXAMPLE
The petrophysical properties of the core samples including the
porosity, permeability and formation resistivity factor actually measured
in the laboratory are listed in Table 3.10. The tortuosity is calculated from
Equation 3.78. Calculate:
1. The arithmetic mean porosity and the median porosity,
2. The arithmetic, geometric and harmonic averages of the corederived
3. The effective permeability, and
4. The Dykstra-Parsons coefficient.
permeability values,
SOLUTION
(1) The arithmetic mean of porosity is obtained from Equation 3.129:
1 1 6 = - @. - -(17 + 14.7 + 6.7 + . . + 15 + 19.4) = 20.81%
- 29 i=l



The arithmetic mean can also be estimated graphically from a plot of
the frequency and cumulative frequency (%) versus porosity, as long as
the histogram is relatively symmetrical, as is the case in most porosity
distributions.
Figure 3.50 is a porosity histogram and distribution (cumulative
frequency) curve for the porosity data shown in Table 3.1 1. It is evident
from this figure that the porosity histogram is not symmetrical. This lack

of symmetry is further confirmed in Figure 3.5 1, which is plot of porosity
data versus the cumulative frequency on a arithmetic probability graph.
Theoretically, if the porosity data approximate a straight line, then a
normal curve, which is completely defined by the arithmetic mean, is a
reasonable fit of the data.



Figure 3.52 shows a significant deviation from the fitted straight line
between 30 and 60 percent cumulative frequency. In this particular
example the porosity distribution is not normal and, therefore, cannot
be represented by the frequency function.
The median porosity corresponds to the 50% point on the cumulative
frequency curve, if the porosity distribution is normal and the histogram
is symmetrical. Theoretically, the median value divides the histogram
into two equal areas, which is not the case in this example, as shown
in Figure 3.51. The median value of porosity (19.3%), shown in this
figure, is only an approximation. The cumulative volume capacity for
the porosity data is calculated in Table 3.12 and plotted in Figure 3.52.
This plot indicates that the distribution of porosity capacity is bi-modal.
(2) Average values of permeability
The arithmetic, geometric and harmonic averages of the 29 corederived
permeability values are, respectively:
k-A = -Ck i - 9 0 + 7 + 4 + 2 2 0 + . . . + 1 3 0 = 655 mD
n 29









- 29
- = ~3 mD n
kH = - 1 1 1 1 1
(.' -+-+-+-+. . . +- 1=1 d) 90 7 4 220 130
The harmonic averaging technique yields, as expected, the lowest value
of average permeability. In this case, the difference between the three
averages is very significant, implying that the formation is extremely
heterogeneous. Another reason for this large difference is that no values
of permeability were cutoff. Generally the amount of cementing material
is high for low permeability values, and low for very high permeability
values.
(3) The effective permeability of this formation is estimated from
Equation 3.124.
From Equations 3.125, we calculate the geometric mean of the natural
log of the core-derived permeability values:
k~ = -j/lnkl Ink2 lnk3.. .Ink, = (1.9855 x lo")& = 4.275 mD
To calculate the variance 0: we need to use Equations 3.126 and 3.127:
- Chki =-1-3 9.54 I n k = - - - - 4.812 mD
n 29
x ( l nk i - In k)2 x ( l nk i - 4.812)2 --1-24 .51 0 2 = -- - - 4.3
n 29 29
Using the geometric mean of the natural log of k values, the effective
permeability is:
ke = (1 + 7) exp [4.275] = 123 mD
(4) The Dykstra-Parsons coefficient is obtained from Equation 3.115.
Using the same approach as in the previous example, we find:
k84.1 = 8.38 mD was obtained by interpolating in Table 3.13 or
Figure 3.53.
The Dykstra-Parsons coefficient is very high, indicating an extremely
heterogeneous reservoir.

You might also like